polymarket_list_events

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint and openWorldHint. The description adds behavioral context by explaining that events use specific parameter names (volume_min/liquidity_min) and that the structure is similar to list_markets. No contradictions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences plus a note, no unnecessary words. It is front-loaded with purpose and immediately provides relevant differentiation. Highly efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the existence of an output schema and annotations, the description covers essential usage: what events are, filtering capabilities, and parameter differences. It assumes knowledge of list_markets, which may be a slight gap, but overall sufficient for a list/filter tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, placing burden on description. The description clarifies the naming nuance for volume_min and liquidity_min but does not explain the other 11 parameters (e.g., start_date_min, tag_id). Some benefit, but insufficient for full parameter understanding.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Browse and filter events (groups of related markets)', identifying the verb (browse/filter) and resource (events). It distinguishes from sibling list_markets by noting 'Same shape as list_markets' and highlighting a key difference in parameter naming.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit guidance on parameter naming differences between events and markets, aiding correct usage. It implies when to use this tool vs list_markets by defining events as 'groups of related markets', though it could more explicitly state when to choose one over the other.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.